This is my personal project in which I tried to evaluate some new ideas and concepts in using 3D techniques for GUI (Graphical User Interface). It’s quite tiny indeed (about 6000 LOC – line of code), all written by myself in about a month (mostly in my free times at weekends). So please don’t blame me on some un-completed or un-polished features, they are just for testing the ideas only. I would try to examine the trend of applying 3D graphics to GUI, but first, let have a look at the video below.

1.   The first thing to consider is not 3D engines or hardwares, it is about usability. Many traditional (2D) GUI out there are already complex and obstructive. GUI is about information presentation and presentation should be really simple and clear so that even my grand mother can understand and use. I’ve been seeking, trying to explore many new ways invented to represent information in 3D (or 2.5D) space, and I could say only a very very small percent of them could make a usable value. Users have long been familiar with 2D, and yet 3D hasn’t been very much persuasive.

2.   3D hardwares can be categorized into 3 groups (as listed on the left), and the 3D engine can be configured to off-load calculations to hardware. With the 1^st type of device, only bitmap operations could be off-loaded. With the 2^nd type of device, many drawing operations (the path_xxx functions) can be off-loaded. The 3^rd type of hardware is most valuable since we can have its finish for ourselves a lot of work.

It’s important to understand the target device our software stack would be running on. If it is an out-date machine with just some blitters, we should use paint-like (aka: bitmaps) operations, while on most modern PC, draw-like (aka: 2D vector) operations are more encouraging. While bitmaps may offer nicer and more customizable GUI, the cons is it lacks the scalable ability that vector has.

3.   The last is about software implementation. Many of the graphics concepts are first introduced in software, which then embedded to hardware, which then standardized by software (like OpenGL or DirectX) again. Thus, many elements of a graphics pipeline is the production of a long history of interactive evolution. A graphics pipleline is not a general framework, it depends on very detailed, in-depth techniques to be operational in real-world application.

Game & graphics are the domains where most formal software methods would easily failed. 3D graphics developers should have good knowledge on graphics in general (bitmap and vector drawing), geometry, linear algebra & discrete maths, deep understanding on data-structures and algorithms… are strong pluses, advanced tips & tricks in coding and optimization is a must (game & graphics programming has always been a hell of tricks from the age of dawn) and finally good understanding on 3D techniques (model, scenegraph, projecting, shading, clipping, lighting, effects…)

We are building something like this, a 3D user interface. Day by day, we’re witnessing more and more diversities in computer user interface: concepts, designs, look and feel, animations, effects… While some would stick to an bare – bone, obscured text console, the others prefer some fancy, eye – candy GUI with all its bells & whistles. Things are much easier now with many 3D libraries and tools. Remind me about how I did all the 3D things: polygon, mesh, texture, sprite, shading, lighting, scene – graph, etc… with C & assembly on DOS!